Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Justice Rivera http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=56963 IN AN ACTION for specific performance of a real estate contract, the parties consented in open court to an order directing the closing. Defendants sellers moved to set aside this order claiming that their attorney did not adequately represent them. The court explained that a stipulation of settlement made by counsel in open court may bind his clients even where it exceeds his actual authority. It noted that strict enforcement served the interest of efficient dispute resolution and was essential to the management of court calenders and integrity of the litigation process. Moreover, it opined that third parties may rely on appearance of authority. Here, if found plaintiff’s reliance on the authority of defendant’s counsel to bind them was reasonable because the attorney had represented defendants at the time they entered into the contract of sale with plaintiff. Finding no fraud, collusion, mistake, or accident to invalidate the contract, it held defendants were bound by the stipulated order.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.